dcfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Charles Victor Szasz (New Earth)
Cancer Weakness I wanted to bring this up. What is the strength of the Illness category? Are there instances where it's just not necessary? The example I'm thinking of in particular involves this page. I added Cancer (linked to Illness) as the Question's weakness, but MrBlonde disagreed, with the justification that it only happened in a couple issues to kill him. I completely see where he's coming from, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to bash MrBlonde in any way. However, I wanted to see what others thought about it and, to rephrase the question to be more specific, "is a brief (but terminal) illness still a weakness"? --- Haroldrocks talk 21:39, March 27, 2014 (UTC) :I guess the distinction I'm making is that the "weakness" slot should be used for things that have a long-term affect on a character. I don't know exactly where I would draw that line... but I wouldn't consider something that affected the characters for less than a year of their multi-decade career. I feel like that's self-explanatory within the history section, and he made no appearances other than 52 during that time. That's not a weakness, it's just a cause of death. - Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 21:58, March 27, 2014 (UTC) ::I cringe every time I see character flaws and the like listed among weaknesses. I feel like the field should be for things like, say, Alan Scott's power's ineffectiveness against wood. Or Hal Jordan's power's ineffectiveness against yellow. Or Superman's weakness to Kryptonite. Every mortal human's weakness is cancer (fictional or not). If I got cancer, it would make me pretty weak. Character flaws like "He loves chocolate so much that he would easily be distracted if you offered him some," are good for a one off joke, but I don't care to have them on pages... - Hatebunny (talk) 22:10, March 27, 2014 (UTC) ::: With that being said, should we do something with the Chocoholism weakness? ::: Also, what should happen with the Illness page if it's not a weakness? Should we only list it as a weakness to characters who are literally immobilized by it, limiting the category to a short handful of characters like Nora Fries? Should we list it for characters who have a history of disease? Should we not have it listed as a weakness at all and simply add the category to characters who have an illness? Or, should we scrap the page altogether? I know that's a barrage of questions but I want to make sure we can find a proper solution. --- Haroldrocks talk 22:26, March 27, 2014 (UTC) :::: FWIW, I see "Weakness" as a defining aspect of a character that tends to be their undoing. Something that is added too a long-running charater for a single story doesn't reach that level. In this case, cancer is a single note - it was added only for 52 and to kill off the character. Some illnesses do meet the criteria of weakness, but mostly those are characters that start out with it. ::::: As for addictions, or mental illness, the same thing applies. If chocohalism doesn't derail the character, it,s a trait, not a weakness. Same for the general mental illness. :::: - Byfield (talk) 23:38, March 27, 2014 (UTC) :Illness is still useful. I wouldn't want to use it for like Weakness: Has the flu this month... but it's useful for things like diabetes, or HIV-positive characters like Mia Dearden. I don't want people to read our article, see "lung cancer" as a major weakness, and then feel confused when they read any Question story from a year other than 2006. :Martian Manhunter seriously struggles with chocoholism as a debilitating problem. Aside from that, chocoholism is a fun page and it's not hurting anything. We're not here to delete inconsequential wiki-humor. I will burn this site to the ground before we get rid of chocoholism, I love that page like it is my first-born son. ::- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 09:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC) :: Alright. I understand that. Can we still put him in the Illness category, though, or is that still insinuating too much? Or does that not explain enough? I just don't want his cancer to be swept under the rug because of its short appearance. --- Haroldrocks talk 10:17, March 28, 2014 (UTC) :::I'm 100% cool with putting him in the category. Other than that, I think an explanation in his history section under 52 is sufficient. - Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 10:41, March 28, 2014 (UTC) ::::To be clear, I'm not against having categories for things like diseases, character traits, and such (as long as enough people share them) - I just don't think we should be psychoanalyzing characters and calling those things weaknesses when they're just aspects of who they are, and not... Kryptonite. - 15:06, March 28, 2014 (UTC) : What about Mental Illness? It's always listed as the Joker's weakness on pretty much any page created for him. But, as it's been mentioned, characters like Joker are not weakened by their mental illness. I don't think most villains are. Firefly's pyromania doesn't hinder him. Ventriloquist's duel personalities doesn't weaken him. Should they still be listed as Weaknesses or should we put simply put them in the category like we just did with the Question and his disease? --- Haroldrocks talk 23:26, March 28, 2014 (UTC) Name Change When did Vic Sage stop using the name Charlie and start using Vic? When did he change his last name from Szasz to Sage? I'm just asking because its not clear in the history. If I had to guess, I'd guess both were when he graduated college and started working as a reporter, but that's not clear. Shadzane �� (talk) 15:03, July 15, 2019 (UTC) Charles Victor Szasz to Charles Szasz Shouldn't it be just Charles Szasz (New Earth)? Since Victor is his middle name ---- Horrorcomicnerd (talk) 16:05, July 22, 2019 (UTC) :Except he was never known as "Charles Szasz". The only time that surname is used is on his full name. He's gone by Charlie and Vic Sage more often, and the latter would be a better candidate for page name than "Charles Szasz". --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']]''217'' 16:15, July 22, 2019 (UTC) ::If he went by "Charlie" in childhood, I'd say "Charles Szasz" is the correct pagename. If he never went by "Charlie" or "Charles" or "Chuck", etc. and has always been "Victor" or "Vic", then I'd say Charles is one of those first names that were never used and "Victor Szasz" is the correct pagename. ::But note that just above this I asked about his childhood names and haven't got an answer yet. Maybe more research is needed. -- Shadzane �� (talk) 16:29, July 22, 2019 (UTC) :::Removing the move tag for now. --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']]''217'' 16:33, July 22, 2019 (UTC)